Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

SCO v. IBM Is Officially Reopened

timothy posted about a year ago | from the living-dead-sequel dept.

IBM 104

stoilis writes "Groklaw reports that the SCO vs IBM case is officially reopened: 'The thing that makes predictions a bit murky is that there are some other motions, aside from the summary judgment motions, that were also not officially decided before SCO filed for bankruptcy that could, in SCO's perfect world, reopen certain matters. I believe they would have been denied, if the prior judge had had time to rule on them. Now? I don't know.'"

cancel ×

104 comments

Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#44022505)

Can't this just die already?

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (5, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#44022583)

Come on, a Congressman has admitted that Snowden isn't lying. The universe had to do something to restore the cosmic balance, didn't it?

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44024335)

CNet made up the whole thing. The misattributed a misquote of congressman Nadler to NSA and titled it "NSA Admits".

Today, after Nadler and a bunch of others complained CNet had to retract:

Updated 6/16 at 11:15 a.m. PT The original headline when the story was published on Saturday was "NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants," which was changed to "NSA spying flap extends to contents of U.S. phone calls," to better match the story. The first paragraph was changed to add attribution to Rep. Nadler. Also added was an additional statement that the congressman's aide sent this morning, an excerpt from a Washington Post story on NSA phone call content surveillance that appeared Saturday, and remarks that Rep. Rogers made on CNN this morning.

Of course this clickbait story comes from the CNet crowd well known for the high standards of journalistic integrity:

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/200524/cnet-reporter-quits-among-reports-cbs-impinged-on-editorial-decision/

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44027143)

Come on, a Congressman has admitted that Snowden isn't lying. The universe had to do something to restore the cosmic balance, didn't it?

You meant COMIC balance, right? Because this is surely a joke.

When I first read the summary, the first thing I thought of was the undead - vampires, zombies, etc. There was a movie about Abraham Lincoln as a vampire hunter, for crying out loud... isn't there a movie about this yet? Seriously, legends about a particularly brutal, sick twisted Transylvanian nobleman gave rise to an evil, undead character in a novel, then other novels were written, then films, TV, etc., followed ad nauseam. Isn't it time SCO got the same treatment?

***
This Summer... in a world in which corporations exist beyond God's graces... a world in which corporations have run wild, threatening the society they're supposed to be part of... Daniel Day-Lewis IS Thomas Penfield Jackson, Undead Patent-Troll Hunter! In life, he took Microsoft to task for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act. In death, he works to KILL companies that should have stayed DEAD.

"It's alive!!! Kill it! Someone kill it quick!"

"Eeeeeek! Help us! Someone save us!"

"I'LL SAVE YOU!"

"Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson! You're ALIVE!"

"YES, AND SOON, SCO WILL NOT BE." (addressing SCO) "I FIND YOU... IN CONTEMPT!"

"Rrrrrgghhh... RRRRGGGGHHH... Rrrrrooooyyyyyaaaaallllltttttiiiiiiiieeeeeeessssssss!"

This Summer, be prepared to patent... your... shorts... it's Thomas Penfield Jackson, Undead Patent-Troll Hunter! Opening July 4th weekend in theaters nationwide.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44040773)

I used up my mod points. I humbly beg your forgiveness.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022587)

I think it's already dead, yet it still moves. It should be crushed to dust, maybe then we'll have peace.

But in the meantime, it will probably provide us with some laughs.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

houghi (78078) | about a year ago | (#44022891)

Nuke the entire planet from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about a year ago | (#44026897)

Nuke the entire planet from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

You know if SCO rises from the dead one more time I might see this as the best option.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (2)

Zordak (123132) | about a year ago | (#44033955)

Nuke the entire planet from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

You know if SCO rises from the dead one more time I might see this as the best option.

Not that likely. SCO only has two counts left, and their big claim---that they own UNIX and everything that ever looked like UNIX---is already taken care of by the Novell judgment. I think what they have left is claims for business torts, like tortious interference with contracts or something along those lines. This looks to me like the judge is opening the case back up just to take inventory: is there anything left here to fight about? If the answer is no, he will promptly toss SCO out on its ear and the whole thing will be well and truly dead.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (5, Interesting)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year ago | (#44022711)

If Bill Gates is now looking for redemption with his foundation . . . this is one disease that he should eradicate.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (3, Insightful)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44023373)

I thought the thinking was that he had helped give this life? Why would he destroy his own creation? After all, he did nothing about Microsoft's monstrosities.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

Vlad_the_Inhaler (32958) | about a year ago | (#44022733)

Somebody hammer a stake through that vampire's heart. Hell - Full Moon is *next* Sunday.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (3, Funny)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44022745)

Can't this just die already?

What did you want, a vampire teen romance? A Star Wars pre-prequel? Another Superman movie?

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year ago | (#44024033)

How about another Spider-Man reboot? It's only been a year or two since the last one. Or how about a new Batman reboot? A Twilight reboot sounds like a good idea too.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44027187)

Or... a new Spider-Man/Bat-Man/Twilight three-way cross-over! Vampire-League America! No, on second thought, that would be lame, as it would necessarily have Spider-Man in it.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

confused one (671304) | about a year ago | (#44022757)

This is one of those zombies that won't quit with a simple hit on the noggin. It's the kind you have to burn to ash, then scatter the ashes to the wind so that the ash won't try to reform a body and come after you. Hopefully, the courts will completely resolve all the claims in the case this round. It's not worth the legal cost; but, IBM should stand its ground and go after all the assets of SCO.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year ago | (#44023091)

WHAT assets? Darl et al already spent the assets. There's nothing left, not even dust under the desks.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

confused one (671304) | about a year ago | (#44023425)

Any and all IP which they claim to own. Patents, trademarks, copyrights, licenses, source, legal documentation, real assets, anything that can be registered to have value and used in future court cases. Every scrap of paper. Every disk. All of it. Then lock it in a vault labelled "Danger -- Zombies -- Do NOT Open"

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

JabrTheHut (640719) | about a year ago | (#44026073)

Any and all IP which they claim to own. Patents, trademarks, copyrights, licenses, source, legal documentation, real assets, anything that can be registered to have value and used in future court cases. Every scrap of paper. Every disk. All of it. Then lock it in a vault labelled "Danger -- Zombies -- Do NOT Open"

No. Open source the code under the BSD license. Let the world do with the source code as they will, and then it will die forever...

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

Shirley Marquez (1753714) | about a year ago | (#44031879)

The problem with that theory is that IBM wins the case by proving that SCO has no intellectual property, leaving nothing to take. I don't think SCO has any remaining real assets to speak of. IBM could claim ownership of the SCO trademark but that surely has negative value by now.

Re: Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44026255)

And the only side effect for burning those bodies would be slight acid rain...

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023079)

dead corps were people too !

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

b4upoo (166390) | about a year ago | (#44023423)

SCO must be like that slave girl in the dungeon. She just can not get hurt enough. Anything short of whacking off the heads of SCO management just won't give them relief.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

eclectro (227083) | about a year ago | (#44023509)

My suggested tag for this story;

diediedie

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (1)

symbolset (646467) | about a year ago | (#44023565)

There are many years left on this story.

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44030525)

MS has money to keep this running...

Re:Braaaaaaaiiiinnns! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44047401)

With Microsoft's confirmed link to SCO, now we have a motive as to how and why this keeps reoccuring.

This reminds me of action movies (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022513)

... where the villain is beaten decisively at the end.

But beaten != dead. And you won't want to miss what happens next.

Re: This reminds me of action movies (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022553)

This is going to be the worst sequel ever.

Re: This reminds me of action movies (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | about a year ago | (#44024801)

I bet it will still be better than Highlander 2.

Re: This reminds me of action movies (1)

sandman83 (1550133) | about a year ago | (#44026711)

Uh, wasn't Highlander: The Source even worse. A movie so heinous that it killed the whole franchise. Now, with that in mind, I would torture the zombie known as SCO just to see if they would kill themselves.

Re: This reminds me of action movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44031873)

Still a better story than Twilight.

We need to rename this (4, Funny)

Chris Mattern (191822) | about a year ago | (#44022563)

I officially move that this case be renamed from SCO v. IBM to Jason Voorhees.

I see this as a good thing (5, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44022585)

While we are probably tired of hearing about and how long this case took, I would like to see an outcome. The thing is that SCO never actually lost the case and IBM never truly won. SCO was tied up in bankruptcy and the Novell case and could not proceed. IBM isn't objecting; I think they want to destroy any remnants of SCO. Personally I would like to see happen would be the GPL tested in a case so any FUD by SCO is rejected in a ruling. Most likely SCO is likely to lose on summary judgement and the GPL issues never go to trial.

Re:I see this as a good thing (5, Insightful)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44022607)

Speak for yourself. Years ago when this same case was going on I had a client implement a no GNU policy and we replaced all our Linux systems with Windows and paid the $699 per core SCO licensing fee for Linux.

The lawyers were all over this. As a result the developers were forbidden to use GNU as it could infringe on someone elses property and it the arguments were like reading the troll posts from Slashdot.

The more this shit hits the headlines in places like CIOmag or InfoWorld.com the stronger the argument agaisnt' GNU and Linux.

Re:I see this as a good thing (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44022645)

And where is your company today with Linux? This will once and all end things if it goes to trial.

Re:I see this as a good thing (5, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44022879)

And where is your company today with Linux? This will once and all end things if it goes to trial.

That has been claimed before.

If history is any guide this will NOT end things once and for all. Why would you even suggest such a thing in the absence of any facts indicating this?

If you follow the money to pay the lawyers, fund discovery, and pay the enormous incidental costs, you will almost surely find that SCO, which has already declared bankruptcy, is getting outside funds, (speculation is from Microsoft), and as long as that money flows there will never be an end to this issue.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44022937)

We all know SCO had no case but what we know has little bearing in legal suits. The case never ended in a settlement or decision or any kind of legal resolution. Let's say, a SCO lawyer comes up to your company tomorrow demanding their Linux royalties or they'll sue your company. If the case is resolved (and we all think in IBM's favor), your company lawyers can give comfortably give SCO lawyers the middle finger. Otherwise they'll have to do a lot of research. If SCO decides to take your company to court, chances are that it will be dismissed on summary judgment rather a lengthy trial.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44023041)

The lawyers for my company and every company I've ever worked for are already well versed in handling shake downs.

A final decision, even one fully in IBMs favor, will not stop these trolls from the behavior you hypothesize.
They will simply move on to another minuscule loop-hole of doubt. Remember that the lawyers own what's left
of SCO, they have nothing to lose.

Re:I see this as a good thing (3, Insightful)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year ago | (#44023113)

Remember that the lawyers own what's left of SCO, they have nothing to lose.

and they want their payday. Since there's nothing left of SCO, they'll have to file nuisance suits from now til the Second Coming of Elvis to get even some of the money they're "owed" via settlements. They've shown they were willing to ride it out to the bitter end.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44023203)

Exactly. And another ruling ruling won't stop them.

Anyone that doubts this needs to google prenda law.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year ago | (#44025187)

Remember that the lawyers own what's left of SCO, they have nothing to lose.

and they want their payday.

SCO's lawyers have no payday incoming. They signed a contract years ago requiring them to take this case as far as the Supreme Court if necessary, for a flat fee (which looked like a more than big enough fee back then, not so much now) which they've long since spent.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year ago | (#44025987)

Ah, but they own the dust that's left over. They'll try to recoup their "loses" by nuisance suits for quick settlement cash.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year ago | (#44034143)

Ah, but they own the dust that's left over.

No, they don't.

Contract was to take a big check, and in exchange, run with the legal action all the way to the bitter end.

Now, the Bankruptcy Trustee might think there's some money to be made there (I think he's wrong, but no telling, really). But the lawyers aren't getting anything but screwed by this, having to face the Nazgul for FREE.....

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44023375)

If SCO decides to take your company to court, chances are that it will be dismissed on summary judgment rather a lengthy trial

That wasn't my point. This was: "If SCO decides to take your company to court, chances are that it will be dismissed on summary judgment rather a lengthy trial."

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023853)

Why would you even suggest such a thing in the absence of any facts indicating this?

If you follow the money [...] you will almost surely find that SCO[...].

Nice way to ask for facts, answering with counter-FUD and speculation? Indeed, high value discussions you have here...

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44024791)

If you follow the money to pay the lawyers, fund discovery, and pay the enormous incidental costs, you will almost surely find that SCO, which has already declared bankruptcy, is getting outside funds, (speculation is from Microsoft), and as long as that money flows there will never be an end to this issue.

Almost certainly not from Microsoft. Five, ten years ago yes. Today, Microsoft offer Linux on Azure and feel remarkably unthreatened by it.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44024845)

Pretty sure SCO would give them a license in exchange for all that background funding, don't you think?

Note that the these background funding arrangements to SCO have already been documented. Google will be of help finding these.

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44025025)

In the past yes, MS have no need of such deals now. While MS may be belligerent, I can't see even them being willing to give up millions of dollars for no actual value.

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44025657)

Almost certainly from Microsoft. Five, ten years ago yes. Today, yes.

FTFY.

They're still doing nasty stuff like SecureBoot, sabotaging WebRTC etc. They'd backstab the Linux community in a heartbeat. Nothing's changed apart from a hell of a lot more social media reputation management.

Re: I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44026853)

I guess you haven't heard about MicroShaft shaking down Android manufacturers. Their mobile offerings are crap and so the only way for them to make money on mobile is to extort it from those that are successful. Once a vendor starts suing its way to profits instead of inventing, its only a matter of time before it goes the way of the dodo bird. Just ask the many companies littered along the highway, including Hayes, Ashton Tate and SCO.
 

Re: I see this as a good thing (1)

Shirley Marquez (1753714) | about a year ago | (#44032063)

Windows Phone is actually a perfectly OK operating system (after many tries - we're up to WP8 after all). What it lacks is apps, and it's never going to get them because developers don't want to have to support three platforms. If they had their way they wouldn't even have to support two, but most accept that as a necessary evil to limit the monopoly power of the platform owners.

Microsoft also gets a big demerit for the way they handled Windows Phone 7. They put a big (unsuccessful) marketing push behind it, and then they announced WP8. They also announced that the WP7 and WP8 apps were incompatible, and that the WP7 phones would never get WP8. They missed the opportunity to show some class - so few WP7 phones had been sold that Microsoft should have simply given a free WP8 phone to everybody who had bought one, thus dodging the accusation of abandoning people who had just bought new Microsoft phones.

Microsoft's best plan for Windows Phone would have been to ignore the consumer market and go all-in on enterprise computing. If they had done that - offered from day one a full implementation of Office, VPN support, domain login, and all the other stuff that the big corporate types wanted, and put a strong emphasis on security - they could have established themselves as a real alternative for some users. instead, they chose to take on iOS and Android head-on, which was guaranteed to lose.

Re: I see this as a good thing (4, Insightful)

jotaeleemeese (303437) | about a year ago | (#44022685)

In the real world pretty much every major company continued using Linux and most startups, some now household names, got of tge ground thanks to Linux and GPL software.

My point being that most people have not believed the fud. ..

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022707)

I have big clients with company lawyers like this all the time. Trying to implement anything gets stonewalled by them. So I just go to their competitors while these manufacturers continue to degrade and get left behind.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44022889)

Speak for yourself. Years ago when this same case was going on I had a client implement a no GNU policy and we replaced all our Linux systems with Windows and paid the $699 per core SCO licensing fee for Linux.

The lawyers were all over this. As a result the developers were forbidden to use GNU as it could infringe on someone elses property and it the arguments were like reading the troll posts from Slashdot.

The more this shit hits the headlines in places like CIOmag or InfoWorld.com the stronger the argument agaisnt' GNU and Linux.

You did at least send a letter about it later how they spent a lot of money and fucked up a lot of projects for you for _nothing_? the lawyers should have been sued for bad recommendation... with lawyers like that who needs sco even. it's not like "GNU" is the core issue even, you could have been sued just as well for using MS.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

plopez (54068) | about a year ago | (#44022909)

You have a lousy legal team. Are they heavily invested in MS btw? I in fact worked for a start up where the partner in charge of tech bought only MS because he had stock in the company. Very unethical.

Re:I see this as a good thing (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44023975)

Basically the corporate whigs do not care about I.T. they care about risk management and keeping their jobs is the number one priority.

In a startup environment that is different. It is risk by its nature.

Unethical about using only MS because they own stock? Ethical as you can get as they own the company and are the customer. My guess is it is probably one of those media companies MS invests in to make .WMV standard. Flash came right in and ruined that.

Money does talk and shit walk in business, but game theory in economics and finance dictate the shareholder does not always come first as everyone's priority is to keep his job. Buying software with known liabilities because some geeks on a website called Slashdot is a sure way to get shitcanned with no references FAST from clueless phb managers. There was a lady too in all the CIOmag press releases who was a SCO shill too. The PHB and directors read these.

While we know it is crap sometimes it is better not to take risks if you have a family to feed and just waste company money instead.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

plopez (54068) | about a year ago | (#44034865)

ONE partner did it, I don't think the others knew his motivation. Hence it being unethical.

Re:I see this as a good thing (2)

ogdenk (712300) | about a year ago | (#44022987)

Should have installed FreeBSD and told them to get f**ked.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about a year ago | (#44023951)

Should have installed FreeBSD and told them to get f**ked.

Oh, this client got rid of secureshell because it was BSD too. I tried to explain it but they heard BSD, oh that is gnu, we aint having it.

We replaced them with an inferior solution which cost $$$$, and was repackaged ssh 2.x code. Basically all free software got lumped together as the fear was if SCO can claim ownership with something who is to say Apple or someone can't do the same with secure shell?

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44024069)

sorry buddy, i hate to break it to ya, but you work for idiots.
most large companies, are not that daft. perhaps you should
look for a new job?

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023017)

Who cares. If a company is dumb enough to fall for this legal rubbish, they deserve all they get. Their costs will rise, they will pass this onto their customers, who in turn we go elsewhere.

Re:I see this as a good thing (2)

phands (1679642) | about a year ago | (#44023339)

That's just nonsense. SCO lost ALL their lawsuits. There is NO argument against Linux - it is pervasive everywhere except the (now declining) PC desktop. A jury decided that SCO did not ever own Unix (Novell did, and retained ownership) after SCO appealed previous judgments that also said Novell was the owner. Your lawyers advised your company badly and wrongly. My company at the time also got the letter from SCO: we binned it as the trash that it was. Virtually no-one paid the $699 extortion fee. It's now time for the IBM nazgul to finally squash the SCO zombie out of existence. I reckon some former SCO execs (The former CEO, Darl McBride; the (dis)information mouthpiece, Blake Stowell to name but 2) should face prosecution for all their lies and corporate malfeasance.

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44033169)

it is pervasive everywhere except the (now declining) PC desktop

Sales of PCs are down, but PCs aren't going away any time soon. Sales are down because everyone who needs one already has one, and unlike ten to twenty years ago it will be servicable for a long time; back then advances in speed brough new apps, but they're speedy enough now.

There will surely be far fewer PC in homes, since PCs are necessary for content creation but tablets are better for content consumption.

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023715)

Speak for yourself. Years ago when this same case was going on I had a client implement a no GNU policy and we replaced all our Linux systems with Windows and paid the $699 per core SCO licensing fee for Linux.

The lawyers were all over this. As a result the developers were forbidden to use GNU as it could infringe on someone elses property and it the arguments were like reading the troll posts from Slashdot.

The more this shit hits the headlines in places like CIOmag or InfoWorld.com the stronger the argument agaisnt' GNU and Linux.

There is no logic in this. I could easily do the same to windows: claim that I hold copyright on some windows stuff, and attack microsoft like sco attacks ibm. And with the same abysmal chance of succeeding. But the case can be drawn out, and in the meantime I can demand royalties from high-profile windows users.

Now - would the kind of people you talk about institute a "no microsoft" policy in this case? And go mac only or something? Not likely. This is not about people being afraid of getting sued by sco. It is just another silly excuse for standardizing on microsoft. Someone got bribed . . .

Re:I see this as a good thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44027197)

This is really an argument for moving your company to a country with sane laws, as this one seems to have lost its goddamned marbles somewhere.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

inode_buddha (576844) | about a year ago | (#44025397)

Judge Kimball already ruled on the GPL way back in 2006 or so. Back during the initial discovery phase. The GPL was upheld as being a perfectly legitimate copyright license, and the judge could find nothing wrong with it.

Re:I see this as a good thing (1)

jbolden (176878) | about a year ago | (#44075807)

The GPL has been tested and it has been upheld. That's already happened. That was one of the reasons that SCO switched this from a copyright claim to a breach of contract claim.

Cock smoking teabaggers (-1, Troll)

magic maverick (2615475) | about a year ago | (#44022597)

You cock smoking teabaggers pay your $699 now.
If all you degenerate Linux lusers had just paid the miserly fee, SCO would have easily bested IBM the first time around. Be denied the license fees that were rightfully theirs...

Re:Cock smoking teabaggers (1)

Sique (173459) | about a year ago | (#44022725)

Oh the irony!

Re:Cock smoking teabaggers (1)

HiThere (15173) | about a year ago | (#44023313)

I can't quite remember the reference. I know I've encountered that before in descriptions of this case.

Vampires (4, Funny)

Alain Williams (2972) | about a year ago | (#44022729)

I always thought that they were mythological, I now have to admit that I was wrong; dead things can come back to try to suck your blood!

Zombie, not Vampire. (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#44026409)

Sorry, but it's a zombie. Vampires are at least smart enough to avoid those things which they are vulnerable to, and avoid drawing undue attention to themselves.

SCO hasn't a single functioning brain left in its ranks. See also that whole parade of crap they've loudly spewed over the past 10 years.

Oh, and one more thing .... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022737)

I bet both late Steve Jobs and Peter Falk turning in their graves out of jealousy.

Happy ending? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022805)

I'm assuming SCO's creditors/former officers will be paying the legal costs incurred over nearly a decade of barratry.

Re:Happy ending? (2, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44022907)

More likely the funding comes from Microsoft, as they are the only entity that benefits by the destruction of all things 'nix.

Re:Happy ending? (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about a year ago | (#44023211)

What about Apple? Wouldn't they gain by having problems raised with Linux and Android?

Re:Happy ending? (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44023355)

Maybe from a financial standpoint, perhaps.
But every Apple OS is based on Opensource software that traces its roots back to Unix, and they would
have just as much to lose as IBM or Novel or any flavor Linux. They would not be funding their own demise.

Re:Happy ending? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about a year ago | (#44023437)

Well Apple uses many of the same utilities in OS X as there are in Linux. Some of Apple's code is GPL licensed (parts of WebKit, cups). Problems raised in Linux would affect them as well.

Re:Happy ending? (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | about a year ago | (#44023639)

More likely the funding comes from Microsoft, as they are the only entity that benefits by the destruction of all things 'nix.

Antivirus companies, Microsoft consultants, game publishers that don't want to/can't support Steam for Linux..... there are plenty of entities that benefit from *nix failures.

Re:Happy ending? (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year ago | (#44023749)

Really?

You don't need Steam to game on Linux. All you need is for Linux to be more than 2% of the user base.

Re:Happy ending? (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | about a year ago | (#44023779)

I realize you don't need Steam to game on Linux. But it has attracted a lot of attention to Linux as a gaming platform. If Linux fails because of SCOmbies, then the publishers who don't support Linux get to say "I told you so" to the ones that do.

Re:Happy ending? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023745)

More likely the funding comes from Microsoft, as they are the only entity that benefits by the destruction of all things 'nix.

I, for one, is waiting for Linus to "hire a hit-man to whack the stupid git". Which he has promised to do if someone sues linux. That, or "change the algorithm"...

Re:Happy ending? (1)

PPH (736903) | about a year ago | (#44024281)

More likely the funding comes from Microsoft,

In before* the latest anti-Troll legislation makes parties behind the litigants reveal themselves as a condition of an IP suit.

*Translation: INB4

Some say its a vampire resurrection.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023315)

But its more like a swarm of evil, foetid carrion zombies, shambling meaninglessly through the courts.

Take pity on the bastards, swat 'em with a cricket bat! [wikipedia.org]

zombie apocalypse (1)

zakeria (1031430) | about a year ago | (#44023519)

Lock and Load once more my friends SCO has reached out its ugly fist from the grave

So if SCO are back (4, Insightful)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#44023659)

I hope their creditors they shafted when they filed for bankruptcy last time are first in line to get paid, before the new lawyers. (and the old ones, since they were the cause of it)

I honestly thought this case was utterly dead... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023881)

...but leave it to the lawyers to flog the carcass and take it for a spin in the litigation Cadillac.

PJ, come back! (2)

Somebody Is Using My (985418) | about a year ago | (#44024521)

PJ [wikipedia.org] , come back! It's not over yet.

Re:PJ, come back! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44037617)

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2013061516065416

fuck!? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44024733)

officers. O7hers

OK... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44026167)

Who forgot to flush the toilet? damn it!
The thurd is still floating.

Re:OK... (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about a year ago | (#44026907)

Who forgot to flush the toilet? damn it!
The thurd is still floating.

We have flushed it several times, but this little round turd just keeps bobbing up to the surface

Eat the guppy! (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#44026387)

Can't IBM just buy the puny shell of SCO, fire everybody, and burn their desks, motivation posters, and Newton's Cradles publicly in a giant bonfire while singing Nah Nah Nah Goodbye?

Re:Eat the guppy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44026607)

Well, they could but that wouldn't have the effect IBM wants. IBM were smeared in a very public campaign. I'm sure IBM wants the world to know that they did in fact do nothing wrong (in this case).

Re:Eat the guppy! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44029327)

SCO has various outstanding claims against it (Novell?, Redhat?) that may bite whoever were to buy it.

Yawn!!! (1)

unixisc (2429386) | about a year ago | (#44027135)

Cant we just put all of SCO's stuff - from SCO ODT right up to UnixWare - under GPL3 or later and call it a day?

GAWD!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44030941)

Will we EVER hear the end of SCO?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...